Very Serious Questions

METH

Yeah. Someone just lowered the boom on Chris Matthews show. Chris asked something like, “is that his legacy– no terrorist attacks since 9/11?”The guy said, “yeah, that’s great. There were none BEFORE 9/11.”

He did that by not prosecuting the chase at all. He did that by allowing Al Quida to go on as if nothinghad ever happened. Al Quida continued to plan, behind Bill Clinton’s doobie smoking cabinet, and pulled off the biggest “suck.it!” in American history.that’s how, Bob

“aah know she’s fat, aaah know she’s ugly, Hillary, but she’ll suck my dick!”That’s what Bill was doing while Al Quida planned.Yes, he CERTAINLY kept us safe..ANDHe taught an entire generation that sticking a stogie up a cunt was equivalent to managing the world’s affairs.The MAN!

Bob,Do you want to know why Osama bin Laden attacked and killed better than four thousand people on Septamber 11?it’s because Bill Clinton made America a laughingstock…not to be taken seriously.9/11 reflects ENTIRELY on Bill Clinton.

okay, Waldo,Let’s see your tiny little response

Ummm…Waaaaaaldo (Same as Bob)

Pooper – I don’t know how long you’ve been here, but Bob and Waldo are DEFINITELY not the same person.

>>Do you want to know why Osama bin Laden attacked and killed better than four thousand people on Septamber 11?Let me guess. You’re going to blame Clinton.>>it’s because Bill Clinton made America a laughingstock…Wrong. But thanks for playing. If you think al-Qaeda orchestrated 9/11 because they thought we were weak and stupid, you’re very misinformed. It was because for many decades we were brash, brazen and militaristic. Bases in Saudi Arabia, for one, Mr. Pooper.

So Pooper, what would you have had Clinton do differently?

Pooper – you once again demonstrate yourself to be vicious, unkind, and unworthy of anyone’s consideration at all. I am sorry for your loss of your wife (if that story has any truth to it), but were I the lady in question, and were this your disposition, I’m sure I’d absent myself as well.QT

Just click on poooper’s name (hotlink) at the bottom of his post and you can see his agenda.

>>okay, Waldo,>>Let’s see your tiny little responsePerhaps it’s due to the lateness of the evening, but I find that quite hilarious.

I only saw the first few words of this blog oon the RSS feed and was laughing before I even clicked through.http://girldujour.wordpress.com/2008/12/17/ws-legacy-so-what/

Political Party Pooper and Travis Disaster are perfect examples of how trolls kill the good intentions of comment sections – which is why I’m a fan of banning.1. Are they bringing anything to the discussion? No, they spew whatever gobbledygook comes to their twisted frontal lobes in the hope of getting a reaction because daddy didn’t love them or women find them unattractive. Or vice versa. (To prove my point, just read their blogs/cry for helps.)2. It’s not a repression of freedom of speech when it’s private property. If a guest comes into my house and starts yelling “Bill Clinton shoving stogies in a vajayjay caused 9/11!” I have every right to shut them the fuck up and boot them out the door. Did I repress them? No, I exercised my right to not hear insanity on my property.That’s just me.In the meantime, history will not look kindly on George Bush/Dick Cheney and their “No Attacks Myth.” If you haven’t read Jane Meyer’s “The Dark Side,” you are missing out on horribly bad these idiots screwed our national security efforts for years to come.

For the record, I endorse banning only in the case of insanity/obviously intentional asshattery. I do NOT endorse banning in the attempts to silence consenting viewpoints – which is the reaction I’ll undoubtedly get pumpkin-bombed with.

>> He did that by not prosecuting the chase at all. He did that by allowing Al Quida to go on as if nothinghad ever happened.I’m a little surprised that Pooper is unaware of the trial & incarceration of Sheik Rahman or the missile strikes against al Qaida – especially the part where Clinton was accused of launching missiles in order to distract from the very serious business of impeaching him over a blow job.And…to put it in prospective – the first bombing at the WTC was 5 weeks after Clinton was inaugurated, so on who’s watch was it that that attack was planned?

Genius–and what really concerns me is terrorism is an asymmetric tactic. As Bill Maher says, we could easily attribute this “no attacks mythology” to his wearing a green shirt on Tuesdays–and what is very dangerous is if something does happen, the right will be calling for impeachment. They are planting the seeds as we speak.All they have left is working the refs: “liberal media,” “in the tank for Obama” et al. This is just another tactic to work the refs and plant the seeds.

Oh Party Pooper… besides being a troll, you’re so utterly, completely wrong.Ronald Reagan presided over the Pentagon’s decision to leave terrorism a civilian matter. That was 1985, Party Poop. All those TV shows and movies that portray elite military forces pursuing terrorists? Utter fantasy. Until 9/11, no US special forces unit had ever gone into combat with al Qaeda or any other terrorist organization. Not one of them, not one time. And yes, I know this for a fact, and can back it up with sourced material.The history of US responses to terror has always been about passing the buck. Bush Sr’s FBI made the decision to leave counterterrorism to the CIA; the Clinton CIA focused its collection efforts on states instead of nonstate actors. Clinton asked the Pentagon two times to come up with an action plan against al Qaeda, and each time was presented with politically impossible ideas. Because, let’s face it, if ANY president had sent 20,000 soldiers to Afghanistan *before* 9/11, he would have been pilloried by the GOP and the press. Afghanistan wasn’t even on the radar for most Americans back then.The pentagon’s resistance to dealing with terrorist threats led to one of the most bizarre experiences I ever had in uniform. When my MAC flight was preparing to land in Kuwait for OP Phantom Dragon in 1997, Kuwaiti security forces spotted an al Qaeda operative with a Stinger missile launcher about a half-mile from the runway and killed him in a hail of bullets. Once we hit the ground, the entire task force practiced defending Kuwait against nonexistent Iraqi RG divisions while a single squad of us carried out “force protection” missions to identify terror cells in Jahara…and then sat on our hands. NOTHING was done.This was such a habit at the Pentagon that in June 2001, Bush agreed to the withdrawal of 2000 Marines from an exercise in Jordan solely because of an unspecified terrorist threat. I wonder what kind of “message” that sent bin Laden, just weeks before 9/11?Pooper, you can blame Clinton all day long, but the policy that led to 9/11 was decades in the making. Lest we forget, it was Bush Junior who ignored the memo “Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States.” He did so because NO ONE took terrorism seriously — at ANY level.

Matt,Who is the commander in chief, Clinton or the Pentagon?If I’m president, and I tell the Pentagon to do something, they better deliver. I’m not absolving President Smush of anything; he has his own vast responsibility for 9/11.But you don’t seem to get that while you were EXPECTED to follow orders, apparently, the Pentagon was not. Whose fault is that?

QT,I apologize if my words offended you. But some here believe that Republicans are to blame for every mess this country has ever been in. Now, as an independent, I can see beyond that. My words about Bill Clinton are disgusting, yes, but what a nation we would live in if only they weren’t rightly applicable to a President.

Bob,I have no problem admitting i am not as informed as i should be. But if you think Al Qaeda (sorry for the earlier misspelling) attacked us because of our bases in Saudi Arabia, I am going to have to congratulate you for believing a myth.Al Qaeda has repeatedly said they now exist as a protest against Israel, and against any nation that helped Israel. Their main objective is the destruction of Israel, the elimination of foreigners and “fake” muslims from muslim land, and the institution of Sharia law in those lands. They aren’t fighting America because of any past aggressions, except to use that flimsy excuse for their crimes against innocents. Make no mistake, Bob, they exist to destroy Israel, and rule the Middle east with Shiria.Bin Laden’s disgrace in Saudi Arabia, and his anger over the Saudi government wanting US troops instead of his has been used for many years as the reason for his hate of America. But the truth is, Bin Laden has been plotting in America since before the first Gulf conflict, which would pretty much put to death the idea that Al Qaeda’s goal of war against America began with American bases in Saudi Arabia. He already had plans to blow up American skyscrapers before 1989.Maybe I’m misinformed about many things, Bob, but this isn’t one of them. Clinton could have gone after Bin Laden and his leaders in Sudan, and didn’t. Sudan actually came to Clinton and the Saudi’s, and asked us what we wanted them to do about Bin Laden. Clinton instructed our ambassador to tell Sudan to have him expelled.If 9/11 isn’t hugely Clinton’s fault, then some other President must have been in office from 1992 until 2000.